YouBet said:

---

InfantryAg said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

I am not proRussia or proPutin but how with this knowledge can you be in favor of continuously cutting checks and support continuing a war with a nuclear power when this war is being fought because 1) dirty American politicans want another ****hole to launder money through 2) we helped instigate this war 3) negotiations would end it quickly and help Ukraine citizens who want to join Russia do that. 4) knowing the events that set off this whole thing were directly orchestrated by George soros.

---

I haven't heard anyone supporting giving unlimited, unchecked money to the ukrainians.
I haven't heard anyone supporting biden escalating this by the dumbs**t way he's handling this.

This isn't an either/or choice, there are other options or combinations thereof.

I support giving very limited money. (also sending IRS agents over there to conduct audits there, instead of on Americans).

I support givng all the munitions ukrain can expend on killing russians, hopefully over the next ten years or until putin is offed or russia goes bankrupt again.

I also support biden + family being investigated and jailed.

The only good communists are dead communists. And a crippled russia allows us to concentrate on defeating (or at least countering) china.

---

Then you aren't listening because Biden and other elected representatives have said just this.

---

In fairness here, it would be foolish to say anything else publicly right now while privately planning for exactly that. Advertising that the US will stop funding by X date or until Y accomplishment just tells Russia exactly how long they have to wait us out.

Admiral Adama said:

---

YouBet said:

---

InfantryAg said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

I am not proRussia or proPutin but how with this knowledge can you be in favor of continuously cutting checks and support continuing a war with a nuclear power when this war is being fought because 1) dirty American politicans want another ****hole to launder money through 2) we helped instigate this war 3) negotiations would end it quickly and help Ukraine citizens who want to join Russia do that. 4) knowing the events that set off this whole thing were directly orchestrated by George soros.

---

I haven't heard anyone supporting giving unlimited, unchecked money to the ukrainians.
I haven't heard anyone supporting biden escalating this by the dumbs**t way he's handling this.

This isn't an either/or choice, there are other options or combinations thereof.

I support giving very limited money. (also sending IRS agents over there to conduct audits there, instead of on Americans).

I support givng all the munitions ukrain can expend on killing russians, hopefully over the next ten years or until putin is offed or russia goes bankrupt again.

I also support biden + family being investigated and jailed.

The only good communists are dead communists. And a crippled russia allows us to concentrate on defeating (or at least countering) china.

---

Then you aren't listening because Biden and other elected representatives have said just this.

---

In fairness here, it would be foolish to say anything else publicly right now while privately planning for exactly that. Advertising that the US will stop funding by X date or until Y accomplishment just tells Russia exactly how long they have to wait us out.

---

You must have missed the Afghanistan withdrawal.

Quote:

---

I think some of it is just the inverse of Trump derangement syndrome. If Biden is for it, then it must be wrong.

---

Not sure how come of you cannot understand that some of us are skeptical of anything coming from Biden or Ukraine because we have all watched the Bidens illegally take millions from Ukraine for access to D.C.

The Ukraine is a US currency laundromat regardless of anything else that is going on.

I'm not following.

twk said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

twk said:

---

NATO has never been a threat to Russia. Period. That's a Russian propaganda line pure and simple.

Giving arms to Ukraine was precisely the right thing to do. An unchecked Russia would be a threat to the rest of the old Warsaw Pact countries had Putin succeeded in rolling over Ukraine. Now that we have crippled the Russian military, how long we want to send aid, and how much, is very much a legitimate question. My view is that we should send them enough to give them a chance for a breakthrough this year. After that, it it's going to be a long term struggle, the Europeans need to carry the bulk of the load.

---

Agreed all around, and you're right, there is plenty of Russian propaganda to go around, but to see it on F16 just goes to show how well Putin has done to get Russian ideas supported by Americans against their own people and government. Times really have changed

---

I think some of it is just the inverse of Trump derangement syndrome. If Biden is for it, then it must be wrong. For me, this is an example of a broken clock being correct twice a day. I would give Biden some credit for not cutting and running (although his incremental approach to dishing out aid has probably not been the best move), but he's got a lot to answer for as to why we even got to this point (Afghanistan, approval of Nordstream 2, pre-invasion statements about Russia taking a slice of Ukraine).

---

This is a really bad take. You could be doing the right thing, but doing it the wrong way. Which is clearly evident by US policy. No one will refute that allowing our O&G to boom would hurt Russia. Yet that isn't even once considered. In fact the opposite has been taking place, our current government has been hurting O&G production.

Reconcile that fact. If you can't then stop attributing good to leaders who clearly don't care about you and no way care about common Ukrainians.

Admiral Adama said:

---

I'm not following.

---

You serious clark?

The global marxists want WW3 so we gonna get WW3.

You people got to get that through your heads.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

The global marxists want WW3 so we gonna get WW3.

You people got to get that through your heads.

---

Okay, then why aren't we all fighting?

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Quote:

---

I think some of it is just the inverse of Trump derangement syndrome. If Biden is for it, then it must be wrong.

---

Not sure how come of you cannot understand that some of us are skeptical of anything coming from Biden or Ukraine because we have all watched the Bidens illegally take millions from Ukraine for access to D.C.

The Ukraine is a US currency laundromat regardless of anything else that is going on.

---

I'm skeptical of everything Biden does. While I agree with supporting Ukraine, I don't think this was some master stroke by Biden. He backed into it after setting the stage for it to happen in the first place.

Yes, Ukraine has a corruption problem (and the Bidens are knee deep in it), but that doesn't determine whether or not backing them now is the right thing to do. So far, what we have done has been very much in our interest. We do need to be careful going forward, but you can't reflexively reject aid to Ukraine just because Bide is for it.

texagbeliever said:

---

twk said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

twk said:

---

NATO has never been a threat to Russia. Period. That's a Russian propaganda line pure and simple.

Giving arms to Ukraine was precisely the right thing to do. An unchecked Russia would be a threat to the rest of the old Warsaw Pact countries had Putin succeeded in rolling over Ukraine. Now that we have crippled the Russian military, how long we want to send aid, and how much, is very much a legitimate question. My view is that we should send them enough to give them a chance for a breakthrough this year. After that, it it's going to be a long term struggle, the Europeans need to carry the bulk of the load.

---

Agreed all around, and you're right, there is plenty of Russian propaganda to go around, but to see it on F16 just goes to show how well Putin has done to get Russian ideas supported by Americans against their own people and government. Times really have changed

---

I think some of it is just the inverse of Trump derangement syndrome. If Biden is for it, then it must be wrong. For me, this is an example of a broken clock being correct twice a day. I would give Biden some credit for not cutting and running (although his incremental approach to dishing out aid has probably not been the best move), but he's got a lot to answer for as to why we even got to this point (Afghanistan, approval of Nordstream 2, pre-invasion statements about Russia taking a slice of Ukraine).

---

This is a really bad take. You could be doing the right thing, but doing it the wrong way. Which is clearly evident by US policy. No one will refute that allowing our O&G to boom would hurt Russia. Yet that isn't even once considered. In fact the opposite has been taking place, our current government has been hurting O&G production.

Reconcile that fact. If you can't then stop attributing good to leaders who clearly don't care about you and no way care about common Ukrainians.

---

I absolutely agree that what Biden and the Democrats are doing to the oil industry is incredibly stupid, but I don't see that being directly tied to Ukraine, or even indirectly, for that matter. Cutting domestic production was just as stupid before the invasion as it is now.

Russia is suffering from lower oil revenue because of sanctions. It would be worse if the global price for oil were lower thanks to more domestic production, but it would not have crippled them quite yet. They are burning through their foreign reserves and will run out of money, but probably not until next year.

twk said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Actually they hold that Russia will take over all of Europe if Ukraine falls but is also on the verge of complete collapse and Ukraine is about to win in 2 weeks. It is logically inconsistent.

TWK, if Russia demographics are so weak then NATO has nothing to fear and therefore Ukraine isn't important. So why does it matter as a strategic point

---

If you want to let Putin conscript the Ukrainains, and the Belarussians, and the residents of the Baltic States, that's about the only thing that would give Russia a lifeline.

Do you think it would have been a good thing to let Russian overrun Ukraine? How exactly would that have benefitted world peace?

---

Are you serious? First off Russia already controls Belarus for all the good it does them. If they somehow control Ukraine (outside of the Eastern region that is more pro Russia) they are going to have a hell of a time keeping that control. There aren't massive amounts of conscripts who will sign up for the Russian Army in their longshot quest to put the USSR back together.

Let's say they do though and Russia gets this "lifeline". How exactly does that impact us? Russia is still zero conventional threat to the US even if they added back all the former USSR. We were fools to ever let the Baltics join NATO btw, we get nothing for that. Is your goal for Russia to become a failed state? I mean that seems to be the goal unless the goal is for the US and NATO to occupy Russia which is complete insanity. Or do you think Russia will decide to become a Western style Democracy? That's not going to happen either, they are culturally and geographically juxtaposed to that ever being functional.

So what happens when Putin is gone (which is a longshot but that's what you seem to want) and Russia fails. What happens to those thousands of nukes? We certainly won't be able to control them, most likely they will fall to whichever strongman gains power where they are located or we get Putin 2.0 because there simply isn't any Yeltsin type leader waiting in the wings in Russia.

You think that is good for "world peace"?

The reality is that Eastern Europe is going to be a mess under pretty much every scenario and unless you want to commit a massive amount of US troops and risk nuclear war there isn't much we can do about it. The good news is it has very little impact on us. Russia is never going to be a power capable of projecting force to threaten the US (beyond nukes) in our lifetimes again. Nothing is going to change that.

twk said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

twk said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

twk said:

---

NATO has never been a threat to Russia. Period. That's a Russian propaganda line pure and simple.

Giving arms to Ukraine was precisely the right thing to do. An unchecked Russia would be a threat to the rest of the old Warsaw Pact countries had Putin succeeded in rolling over Ukraine. Now that we have crippled the Russian military, how long we want to send aid, and how much, is very much a legitimate question. My view is that we should send them enough to give them a chance for a breakthrough this year. After that, it it's going to be a long term struggle, the Europeans need to carry the bulk of the load.

---

Agreed all around, and you're right, there is plenty of Russian propaganda to go around, but to see it on F16 just goes to show how well Putin has done to get Russian ideas supported by Americans against their own people and government. Times really have changed

---

I think some of it is just the inverse of Trump derangement syndrome. If Biden is for it, then it must be wrong. For me, this is an example of a broken clock being correct twice a day. I would give Biden some credit for not cutting and running (although his incremental approach to dishing out aid has probably not been the best move), but he's got a lot to answer for as to why we even got to this point (Afghanistan, approval of Nordstream 2, pre-invasion statements about Russia taking a slice of Ukraine).

---

This is a really bad take. You could be doing the right thing, but doing it the wrong way. Which is clearly evident by US policy. No one will refute that allowing our O&G to boom would hurt Russia. Yet that isn't even once considered. In fact the opposite has been taking place, our current government has been hurting O&G production.

Reconcile that fact. If you can't then stop attributing good to leaders who clearly don't care about you and no way care about common Ukrainians.

---

I absolutely agree that what Biden and the Democrats are doing to the oil industry is incredibly stupid, but I don't see that being directly tied to Ukraine, or even indirectly, for that matter. Cutting domestic production was just as stupid before the invasion as it is now.

Russia is suffering from lower oil revenue because of sanctions. It would be worse if the global price for oil were lower thanks to more domestic production, but it would not have crippled them quite yet. They are burning through their foreign reserves and will run out of money, but probably not until next year.

---

So if we devalued their most important financial tool that would cause them to collapse faster. I would be shocked if one of the reasons Putin chose now to invade Ukraine because he knew Biden and UK would not use that lever.

Again if the US hits a recession in the next 6 months it won't matter if Russia will fail in another 6 months. We will already have had to tap out. Can you at least respect the fact that I am adjusting the ends (Russia getting ukraine or significant gains at least) to the means we are willing to use.

Quote:

---

The reality is that Eastern Europe is going to be a mess under pretty much every scenario and unless you want to commit a massive amount of US troops and risk nuclear war there isn't much we can do about it. The good news is it has very little impact on us. Russia is never going to be a power capable of projecting force to threaten the US (beyond nukes) in our lifetimes again. Nothing is going to change that.

---

Outside of Ukraine, how is Eastern Europe a mess right now? The only mess is the one that Putin has created. Everywhere else in Eastern Europe, that falls under the NATO umbrella, things are looking pretty good.

Quote:

---

So if we devalued their most important financial tool that would cause them to collapse faster. I would be shocked if one of the reasons Putin chose now to invade Ukraine because he knew Biden and UK would not use that lever.

---

I think that Putin calculated that the war would be over before the US, or anyone else, could bring any pressure to bear. He also didn't think the Europeans would be able to get by without Russian natural gas. And, after the US relented in approving Nordstream 2, I can understand his assuming the latter.

Eastern europe is looking okay because they are rejecting the EU policies. As the years drag on Russia will be more aligned and less of a threat than the progressive "good" coming from their west.

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

So if we devalued their most important financial tool that would cause them to collapse faster. I would be shocked if one of the reasons Putin chose now to invade Ukraine because he knew Biden and UK would not use that lever.

---

I think that Putin calculated that the war would be over before the US, or anyone else, could bring any pressure to bear. He also didn't think the Europeans would be able to get by without Russian natural gas. And, after the US relented in approving Nordstream 2, I can understand his assuming the latter.

---

He will have more than 1 strategy. There was no way he said we take kiyv in 2 weeks or we lose. What enabled him was the knowledge that a 2nd and 3rd strategy were prime with Biden in office and the covid economic turmoil.

texagbeliever said:

---

Eastern europe is looking okay because they are rejecting the EU policies. As the years drag on Russia will be more aligned and less of a threat than the progressive "good" coming from their west.

---

Don't get me started on the EU. What a bunch of morons. It's amazing that anything gets done over there despite the red tape coming from Brussells.

But, I have to dissent from your view that Eastern Europe will become more aligned with Russia than with the rest of Europe. Even given the differences that Poland and Hungary have had with the EU, they are a long way from falling into Russia's orbit. The Poles, in particular, have been very outspoken in countering Russia's aggression. And, economically, they couldn't be farther apart; Russia is a kleptocracy. Poland has a strong free market economy.

Maybe I'm old school, but to answer your question, our arms and equipment used for killing Russians is never a bad thing

Quote:

---

Russia is never going to be a power capable of projecting force to threaten the US (beyond nukes) in our lifetimes again. Nothing is going to change that.

---

We just saw a biological weapon become the most effective weapon of all time.

twk said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Eastern europe is looking okay because they are rejecting the EU policies. As the years drag on Russia will be more aligned and less of a threat than the progressive "good" coming from their west.

---

Don't get me started on the EU. What a bunch of morons. It's amazing that anything gets done over there despite the red tape coming from Brussells.

But, I have to dissent from your view that Eastern Europe will become more aligned with Russia than with the rest of Europe. Even given the differences that Poland and Hungary have had with the EU, they are a long way from falling into Russia's orbit. The Poles, in particular, have been very outspoken in countering Russia's aggression. And, economically, they couldn't be farther apart; Russia is a kleptocracy. Poland has a strong free market economy.

---

They aren't "morons" they are corrupt elitists. That is probably the biggest difference in our mindsets. You attribute incompetence that I consider malice.

History shows that an ally, even temporarily, need not be the long term best bet. It just needs to be presently the most expedient. Russia and eastern Europe may be a forced union. Not that they will fight wars together but that they will be economic partners.

Urban Ag said:

---

Probably the biggest gripe I have ever had with this board (in reading and posting here for almost two decades) is how anyone that questions or opposes US support for Ukraine is labeled as pro-Putin or pro-Russia, For the record I despise both, always have. Likely always will in what years I have left on this planet.

Russia sucks. But Ukraine is one of the most absolutely corrupt nations on this globe. Mexico level corruption. After the fall of the USSR they sold untold amounts of weapons and munitions to some of the worst regimes and groups out there out their vast stockpiles sitting around. Ukrainians have been in bed with the absolute worst and most corrupt US politicians (hello Bidens) and businesses we have to offer. No one gave a sh** about this country prior to the Russian invasion. And let's be honest, the only reason the American left gives a rat's ass is a continuation of the Russia Russia Russia bullsh** lib narrative against Trump. And Zelynsky was just another eastern Euro trash grifter until it became cool for him to zoom meeting in to film festivals packed with libs.

I genuinely feel for the folks in Ukraine who have had their lives disrupted and destroyed by Putin's madness. I also genuinely feel for the young Russian men, mostly conscripts, who find themselves being slaughtered in a completely immoral military conflict against a people they have absolutely no desire to bring harm to.

The whole thing is a colossal sh** show. The type of thing I truly hoped civilized peoples would be beyond by 2023. Horrible.

---

I think this is where most sensible people are, but you have loud dumbasses that say inane nonsense like celebrating dead Russians and trying to do the Texags kabuki theatre version of "if you don't support this you are a draft dodger" kind of idiocy.

Quote:

---

History shows that an ally, even temporarily, need not be the long term best bet. It just needs to be presently the most expedient. Russia and eastern Europe may be a forced union. Not that they will fight wars together but that they will be economic partners.

---

Partners on what? Outside of capitalizing on natural resources, there's not a whole lot going on in Russia economically, and the war has made that situation much worse, chasing off a lot of young professionals. The Eastern Europeans have bought a lot of gas and oil from Russia, but that doesn't exactly make them economic partners (if it did, we'd have been "partners" with the Saudi's back before the shale boom).

Things they use to get from the western EU will need to be made somewhere. It won't be overnight but the realignment is possible. Or the western EU will get thier act together and reject the progressive mantra.

How about this? The United States government, the social media corporations and the mainstream media lost all credibility with me (and I'd assume many Americans) following the covid lies.

I don't believe anything they say and I don't support anything they do. I don't care which politics side is running the narrative. I've seen enough lies since Vietnam to know it's all about the $$$.

And this is someone pre-covid had zero reservations about our federal government and pretty much believed some of the mainstream media.

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

The reality is that Eastern Europe is going to be a mess under pretty much every scenario and unless you want to commit a massive amount of US troops and risk nuclear war there isn't much we can do about it. The good news is it has very little impact on us. Russia is never going to be a power capable of projecting force to threaten the US (beyond nukes) in our lifetimes again. Nothing is going to change that.

---

Outside of Ukraine, how is Eastern Europe a mess right now? The only mess is the one that Putin has created. Everywhere else in Eastern Europe, that falls under the NATO umbrella, things are looking pretty good.

---

"Right now" isn't the question. The question is the future. If Russia becomes a failed state then someone will fill the vacuum. History has shown that over and over again. Do you want that to be the US and NATO? Ok, where does that end? How far do you want the empire to extend? That's effectively what you are talking about. Maldova is a mess and about to get messier too btw. Belarus is a mess. Romania has issues. I wouldn't consider the Slavic countries and Greece, Albania, and North Macedonia to be trouble free either and they are all weak. Poland and the Baltics are doing pretty well as are Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Turkey is the most likely country to fill a void if Russia falters. They are barely hanging on to NATO, they have a legit military, and they are strategically placed.

Next most likely is whomever takes over from Putin or one of the new warlords in that aftermath makes a move. Maybe Belarus as well. Who knows?

The more likely scenario is warring factions within those countries flaring up and fighting for control both within their countries and pushing into others. That's the history. There is a reason Ukraine for instance has only really been a country of its own for a few decades out of the last 1000 years. Those countries geographically and demographically will always be pawns of others or to be in a state of civil war. Mainly though they are countries with very, very little US interests involved. Who is in control of Ukraine or Belarus or Latvia doesn't move the needle for us when you compare it to say, Taiwan. We actually need Taiwan for Semiconductor manufacturing.

We have to prioritize and most of the arguments made around this war seem to focus on trying to win a war we already won with Russia 30 years ago. I remember going to East Berlin as a kid and having a Russian officer question me at Checkpoint Charlie in the '80s. We are so far from anything like that it isn't even worth discussing it and that isn't going to happen again.

The second argument seems to be more of a "Team America" type ideal of playing world cop and spreading freedom across the globe. Have we not learned that lesson enough times to realize it just doesn't work? Hell it took me a long time to come to that conclusion as well but I got there. Hell I grew up a military brat with a Dad that served 28 years in the AF and 3 Tours in Nam. I was all about Reagan and both Bushes and let's kick Saddam's ass. Some of those conflicts made a lot of sense but this one does not. The older I get the more I look back at the wisdom of Eisenhower's "Military Industrial Complex" speech and realize what he meant. We need to prioritize our military and what it is being used for and find ways to avoid using it when we don't have to. We don't have the stomach to be an empire so let's quit acting like one.

#Russia: Something's not right with this military recruitment billboard... pic.twitter.com/TEhchFeE0J

— Igor Sushko (@igorsushko) November 27, 2022

Western Europe was once plagued by repeated wars. That's not been the case since the end of WWII, even without any one European country dominating the others. There's no reason why wars of conquest need to be the order of the day in Eastern Europe.

The US doesn't need to police a bunch of conflicts so long as everyone just minds their own business. That's what we've seen in Western Europe, and could see in Eastern Europe. The future of Russia is an important question, but it doesn't necessarily determine all others in the region.

Waffledynamics said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Is he worse than Zelensky or Biden to you? Hell I don't pay much attention to analyst names.

---

I want to go back to this reply really quick. This is the perfect example of what happens day in and day out not just on here, but all over the place. Much of political discourse is reactionary opposition. People like what and who they like and dislike what and who they dislike. There will be no bridging of any gaps, because that's not the point.

Some of us follow this conflict carefully. You compare us to the Covid "experts", but the difference between us and them is that those people didn't like to show their work. They didn't like to actually show their reasoning. When confronted, they had little to no answers or easily disproven falsehoods. They just wanted us to all shut up and obey.

Meanwhile, there is a long-running thread and numerous resources outside of that thread to figure out more or less what's going on. There's a lot of transparent information and actual visual confirmation of what is happening. As said on previous threads, this war is basically being livestreamed on Telegram and other platforms. Do we know everything? No, but we know a lot, and we weed out untrustworthy information sources fairly well, whether they have a pro-Russia or pro-Ukraine bend. The point of the main thread is to try to understand and follow what is going on.

Meanwhile, back to the quoted reply: you don't even pay attention to the sources of information in a conflict that sees heavy disinformation and propaganda for actual military and geopolitical gains by both sides. We're not talking about the BS handwaving of calling whatever is bad for the Democrats mis/disinformation. We're talking about the real thing as the word "disinformation" was originally defined for, and you allow yourself to take in "analysis" from a convicted child predator that is an actual paid contributor to an official source of Russia's propaganda, and who has been wrong about damn near everything that he has said regarding the war.

How can anything you post be taken seriously or be given serious credibility? How is it any different from trolling?

---

Great response that will be ignored by most of the hardcore anti-Ukraine-help people on here, which will ironically enough also prove your point even further.

twk said:

---

Western Europe was once plagued by repeated wars. That's not been the case since the end of WWII, even without any one European country dominating the others. There's no reason why wars of conquest need to be the order of the day in Eastern Europe.

The US doesn't need to police a bunch of conflicts so long as everyone just minds their own business. That's what we've seen in Western Europe, and could see in Eastern Europe. The future of Russia is an important question, but it doesn't necessarily determine all others in the region.

---

Western and Eastern Europe are fundamentally different in almost too many ways to count. Germany and France are night and day from Ukraine and Belarus.

Look, if Western Europe wants to go have fun in Eastern Europe that's fine with me but I don't see why we need to be spending hundreds of billions on it. Hell I'm happy to sell them weapons to do it and provide diplomatic support. I don't see any justification as to why the US is taking the lead on this though and providing most of the money and arms for.... World Peace? To defeat the Russians?

The reality as well is we are playing around with a country run by a less than stable guy who can push a button and make most of the US glow in the dark. If we are going to take that kind of risk it had better damn well be for something that is very much in our national interest. This war simply isn't that important to us strategically and you have yet to make a real argument that it is outside of the "Beat the Russians so we can declare victory again in the Cold War that we already won" or some vague "World Peace" argument that relies on a rainbows and unicorns scenario of what happens when Russia is a failed state and the wonderfully corrupt folks that run Ukraine have control. Apparently everyone else will just hold hands and sing "Kumbaya" as Eastern Europe becomes part fully part of NATO yet we can't decide if we will let the "New Russia" join the Party or if we just make them into a permanent pariah of a failed state and hope they just leave everyone alone.

Every action has a consequence and you need to play this game a few more moves down the chess board while looking at it with a realistic lens.

twk said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

What about when nato member UK attacked Argentinians fighting for freedom/independence?

---

If every time you post something you lose more credibility, it might be time to step away from the keyboard.

---

Not sure he can. He defends Russia like its his job and he appears to be on the clock.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Is he worse than Zelensky or Biden to you? Hell I don't pay much attention to analyst names.

---

I want to go back to this reply really quick. This is the perfect example of what happens day in and day out not just on here, but all over the place. Much of political discourse is reactionary opposition. People like what and who they like and dislike what and who they dislike. There will be no bridging of any gaps, because that's not the point.

Some of us follow this conflict carefully. You compare us to the Covid "experts", but the difference between us and them is that those people didn't like to show their work. They didn't like to actually show their reasoning. When confronted, they had little to no answers or easily disproven falsehoods. They just wanted us to all shut up and obey.

Meanwhile, there is a long-running thread and numerous resources outside of that thread to figure out more or less what's going on. There's a lot of transparent information and actual visual confirmation of what is happening. As said on previous threads, this war is basically being livestreamed on Telegram and other platforms. Do we know everything? No, but we know a lot, and we weed out untrustworthy information sources fairly well, whether they have a pro-Russia or pro-Ukraine bend. The point of the main thread is to try to understand and follow what is going on.

Meanwhile, back to the quoted reply: you don't even pay attention to the sources of information in a conflict that sees heavy disinformation and propaganda for actual military and geopolitical gains by both sides. We're not talking about the BS handwaving of calling whatever is bad for the Democrats mis/disinformation. We're talking about the real thing as the word "disinformation" was originally defined for, and you allow yourself to take in "analysis" from a convicted child predator that is an actual paid contributor to an official source of Russia's propaganda, and who has been wrong about damn near everything that he has said regarding the war.

How can anything you post be taken seriously or be given serious credibility? How is it any different from trolling?

---

Great response that will be ignored by most of the hardcore anti-Ukraine-help people on here, which will ironically enough also prove your point even further.

---

The point you guys keep missing is that most "anti-Ukraine" folks here are also "anti-Russian". Both are deeply corrupt countries that regularly engage in disinformation and will use any tactics for propaganda. Maybe you forgot about Ukraine sending missiles into Poland and then trying to blame the Russians until they got caught?

They both suck and getting into a "Well, Zelensky and his guys may be corrupt and lie constantly but Putin and HIS guys are even worse!" isn't the argument you think it is. The argument most people here have is "screw both of them, we have a lot more important things to worry about than who controls the Donbass".

aggie93 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Waffledynamics said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Is he worse than Zelensky or Biden to you? Hell I don't pay much attention to analyst names.

---

I want to go back to this reply really quick. This is the perfect example of what happens day in and day out not just on here, but all over the place. Much of political discourse is reactionary opposition. People like what and who they like and dislike what and who they dislike. There will be no bridging of any gaps, because that's not the point.

Some of us follow this conflict carefully. You compare us to the Covid "experts", but the difference between us and them is that those people didn't like to show their work. They didn't like to actually show their reasoning. When confronted, they had little to no answers or easily disproven falsehoods. They just wanted us to all shut up and obey.

Meanwhile, there is a long-running thread and numerous resources outside of that thread to figure out more or less what's going on. There's a lot of transparent information and actual visual confirmation of what is happening. As said on previous threads, this war is basically being livestreamed on Telegram and other platforms. Do we know everything? No, but we know a lot, and we weed out untrustworthy information sources fairly well, whether they have a pro-Russia or pro-Ukraine bend. The point of the main thread is to try to understand and follow what is going on.

Meanwhile, back to the quoted reply: you don't even pay attention to the sources of information in a conflict that sees heavy disinformation and propaganda for actual military and geopolitical gains by both sides. We're not talking about the BS handwaving of calling whatever is bad for the Democrats mis/disinformation. We're talking about the real thing as the word "disinformation" was originally defined for, and you allow yourself to take in "analysis" from a convicted child predator that is an actual paid contributor to an official source of Russia's propaganda, and who has been wrong about damn near everything that he has said regarding the war.

How can anything you post be taken seriously or be given serious credibility? How is it any different from trolling?

---

Great response that will be ignored by most of the hardcore anti-Ukraine-help people on here, which will ironically enough also prove your point even further.

---

The point you guys keep missing is that most "anti-Ukraine" folks here are also "anti-Russian". Both are deeply corrupt countries that regularly engage in disinformation and will use any tactics for propaganda. Maybe you forgot about Ukraine sending missiles into Poland and then trying to blame the Russians until they got caught?

They both suck and getting into a "Well, Zelensky and his guys may be corrupt and lie constantly but Putin and HIS guys are even worse!" isn't the argument you think it is. The argument most people here have is "screw both of them, we have a lot more important things to worry about than who controls the Donbass".

---

Never said anyone was "anti-Ukraine" in that post, and that wasn't the point of his post. His point was that people are so ingrained in their own beliefs that they will use a literal paid Russian propagandist and twice convicted sex offender to make an argument just because they happen to agree with the points.

Also if "Ukrainians sending missiles into Poland and blaming Russia" is your argument as to why they are corrupt, you are aware those were defensive missiles fired at Russian attacks correct? They would have never been fired had Russia not invaded and continued to bomb civilians.

Waffledynamics said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Is he worse than Zelensky or Biden to you? Hell I don't pay much attention to analyst names.

---

I want to go back to this reply really quick. This is the perfect example of what happens day in and day out not just on here, but all over the place. Much of political discourse is reactionary opposition. People like what and who they like and dislike what and who they dislike. There will be no bridging of any gaps, because that's not the point.

Some of us follow this conflict carefully. You compare us to the Covid "experts", but the difference between us and them is that those people didn't like to show their work. They didn't like to actually show their reasoning. When confronted, they had little to no answers or easily disproven falsehoods. They just wanted us to all shut up and obey.

Meanwhile, there is a long-running thread and numerous resources outside of that thread to figure out more or less what's going on. There's a lot of transparent information and actual visual confirmation of what is happening. As said on previous threads, this war is basically being livestreamed on Telegram and other platforms. Do we know everything? No, but we know a lot, and we weed out untrustworthy information sources fairly well, whether they have a pro-Russia or pro-Ukraine bend. The point of the main thread is to try to understand and follow what is going on.

Meanwhile, back to the quoted reply: you don't even pay attention to the sources of information in a conflict that sees heavy disinformation and propaganda for actual military and geopolitical gains by both sides. We're not talking about the BS handwaving of calling whatever is bad for the Democrats mis/disinformation. We're talking about the real thing as the word "disinformation" was originally defined for, and you allow yourself to take in "analysis" from a convicted child predator that is an actual paid contributor to an official source of Russia's propaganda, and who has been wrong about damn near everything that he has said regarding the war.

How can anything you post be taken seriously or be given serious credibility? How is it any different from trolling?

---

First of all your distinction is false. Look at f84. They loved to show their 'work' (and groupthink, and to flag dissent) and how incredibly smart their chosen 'expert' totalitarian sheep were. Some even went so far as to postulate people...should be banned for questioning their analyses/science. As in, the entirety of the US government worked to coordinate public wrong-think suppression.


Which, similarly, is what you are hinting at; 'nortex is just trolling, look, he is citing a discussion involving Scott Ritter, whom I consider discredited by virtue of his being a pedophile, clearly he should be banned for trolling.'

If any one side isn't paying attention to the history of the region, parties, and impact of modern warfare as well as efficacy of US munitions and aid to extend this one, it is not me/mine. You can sneer at me from your keyboard as "Ivan" or a "pedophile supporter" somehow now, all you want, but what I won't do is comport to your very low standard of 'discussion' or respect. Whenever I come across something I feel adds to the discussion, whether or not 'waffledynamics' might agree with it, I'll just continue to post it if I feel like it.